A blanket for a blanket and the whole world goes... cold?
Why do they need to be alliterations though? I mean, sugar daddy isn't one either.
They shouldn't give a Fuchs.
To me, chances seem high he had some mental health problems, just like the "psychosis encouraged by ChatGPT" murder case some time ago. Substitute ChatGPT for Russian intelligence services on Telegram and you could get exactly this.
I mean, he tried committing suicide right after the murders. That doesn't sound like a well adjusted individual.
I
all small
I think not, that we the same definition of "ALL" have.
This is exactly this, on that me my C2 English certificate prepared has.
I question me but: Should you substantives like in German or like in English bigwrite?
Warum hast du den Shrek-Pustearbeit-Bildtextbuchstabe¹ genommen? Ich sehe die Verbindung nicht...
¹
Der Begriff „Emoji“ stammt aus der japanischen Sprache und bedeutet „Bildschriftzeichen“.[2] Er setzt sich aus den Schriftzeichen 絵 für „e“ (Bild), 文 für „mon“ (Text) und 字 für „ji“ (Buchstabe) zusammen.[2]
I cannot respond to everything but this point strikes me:
pretty harmless observation
In a vacuum, yes, these are harmless observation. When you look at the broader picture though, you will find strong connections to rejecting all of science and to the far right.
Anytime someone mentions astrology (at least online, I do not know anyone who believes in it IRL) it is just a matter of time until they talk about the COVID vaccine and a supposed "New World Order" by the IWF, Jews and whatnot.
At least that's the case in Germany. You can read a bit more here, you may want to use machine translation. Article published by the Federal Agency for Civic Education.
https://www.bpb.de/themen/rechtsextremismus/dossier-rechtsextremismus/550441/rechtsextreme-esoterik/
How else would they manage the 12 billion euro per year in church tax from their members which the government collects for them for free?
Not to forget the 600 million euro in yearly damag payments for condemning large swaths of church owned property (e.g. entire cities) ~200 years ago due to Napoleon.
I propose a better definition:
Planets are very large objects orbitting a star that dwarf everything nearby
I'm pretty sure this is the intent of the IAU's definition. It's just more specific.

It can result in some rather clunky terms though.
And frankly, "fructose foster parent" is cheating. That's on the same level as, say, "sugar step daddy".